• Yondu_the_Ravager@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    It really fucking sucks that the auto industry lobbied the US government so goddamn hard in the 30’s - 70’s and got so much of this country built on car centric infrastructure while also systemically dismantling countless forms of public transit nationwide too. Most major cities and metropolitan areas used to have a pretty comprehensive streetcar system, yet where are they now? That’s right, manufacturers like GM bought majority stakes in those companies and then had their infrastructure dismantled all in the name of “progress.”

    • Fried_out_Kombi@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      As far as I’m aware, the only city in the western world that truly kept its pre-automobile streetcar network was Melbourne, Australia. A result is it today has the largest tram network of any city in the world.

      It hurts my soul to imagine how basically every city in North America had similar networks, but they were almost completely annihilated, save for small fragments in a small handful of cities.

  • Machefi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t understand this visualisation. Perhaps I’m lacking context. Anybody willing to do ELI5… maybe ELI15? What quantity is being compared and what are potential passengers?

  • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yes, but context matters. Nobody is taking a train up the street to get groceries. And using a car (or a huge ass truck) for that is often overkill.

    Bikes FTW!

    • biddy@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      This visualization is space efficiency.

      Obviously cars have terrible energy efficiency. The most efficient vehicle is a bicycle, since exercise is good for you it’s arguably negative energy usage.

      As for time efficiency, you have to consider car dependent development as a package. Everything spreads out, so overall there may not be an improvement in time efficiency, especially when you factor in the longer travel time of people not in cars. You could even consider the time spent working to pay for the car, or the time lost from people killed by the car, and I doubt cars would come out particularly time efficient then.

  • Durotar@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    People don’t drive cars because they think they’re efficient in absolute numbers. They drive cars, because cars are way more comfortable and faster than anything else in everyday life.

    • magiccupcake@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      They’re only faster because transit infrastructure is built exclusively for cars at the expense of everyone else, including car drivers. Driving during rush hour sucks, but many people don’t have a choice.

    • ashok36@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      The only thing I wish is that we had more accessible and safe single-seat vehicles. I bring 3 empty seats with me to work every day. I would be more than happy to have a cheap, efficient single seat vehicle for commuting if it was safe. I’m not going to ride a motorcycle 25 miles each way every day in the Florida heat and rain. I’m certainly not going to share the road with the maniacs we have here on a motorcycle.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I’m certainly not going to share the road with the maniacs we have here on a motorcycle.

        In other words, it isn’t that biking or motorcycling or walking or whatever isn’t safe, it’s that the presence of cars makes everything unsafe (including the cars themselves).

        Similarly, bike lanes etc. are car infrastructure, not bike infrastructure, because in the absence of cars cyclists would have no problems using the normal lanes. (Remember that the next time some dipshit complains about spending on bike lanes or cyclists not paying their “fair share.”)

        Pretty much every argument drivers have against other transportation modes is rooted in projection.

    • Lobohobo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      There is always exceptions and in some areas, you have to have some cars. But removing most of the cars and replacing most of the 8 lanes of traffic with alternatives would be more than enough.

    • IHateRedditAndSpez@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      that’s a problem with the city and not with public transit. there are many cities where public transit is safe, it always depends on the general safety of the city

    • Not_Alec_Baldwin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      There was a woman who would beg for money on the last stretch of my commute home. Either she was on the bus or she must have been coming back from the other end of the line.

      Every now and then she would start shrieking. Once she started she just… Didn’t stop. She would walk the length of the bus shrieking directly in people’s faces. This happened about a dozen times before I just started getting off the bus if I saw her. I would rather walk 30 minutes then have to put up with her.

      I’m my country the transit system won’t ban anyone because it is considered excessive punishment for the extremely poor.

      As a result, transit just sucks for everyone.

      Behavior that is anti-social should be unacceptable. We’re so afraid of placing limits on anyone that the most unstable/unwell place limits on the rest of us.

      In the case of the woman I mentioned, she’s also a victim. There’s no proper support for her. She needs help too.

  • nomadjoanne@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Efficiency is not the objective. In fact, were all energy and materials used in making and powering cars from relatively renewable sources, it wouldn’t be a problem. I am aware they’re not. All else being equal, efficiency is a worthwhile goal. But the tradeoff for inefficiency here is the freedom to go where you want when you want.

    There are places here in Europe, contrary to what some people in this community might claim, that simply cannot be accessed by train. Smaller villages and the like.

    Access to a car is useful. Ownership might not be unless you live there. But cars have their place.

    • Thadrax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      But cars have their place.

      True. However with all the downsides of cars, they should be only the fallback if most other options don’t work. As it is, in many places, they are the highest priority that everything is planned around.

  • Hazdaz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Gonna use some of that suburban rail to travel dooway-to-doorway. Oh wait. No, you can’t. It is almost as if having options for different needs is important. Instead let’s use overly simplistic explanations for a rather complicated problem.